Suppr超能文献

为养老院组织全科医疗服务:一项多方法研究。

Organising general practice for care homes: a multi-method study.

作者信息

Hanratty Barbara, Stocker Rachel, Sinclair David, Brittain Katie, Spilsbury Karen, Stow Daniel, Robinson Louise, Matthews Fiona E

机构信息

Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Apr;13(11):1-68. doi: 10.3310/YNDV6358.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

General practice provides first-line National Health Service care for around 400,000 care home residents. Good primary care can enhance residents' health and well-being and optimise use of hospital services.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore the relationships between organisation of general practice and the perspectives and experiences of residents, general practice and care home staff, outcomes and costs.

DESIGN

Survey of general practices (2018), qualitative study (2019), analysis of primary care data (2019-21).

POLICY CONTEXT

National Health Service England Vanguard funded innovation in services for care homes in five areas (2015-8); Enhanced Health in Care Homes introduces standardised care home healthcare processes in England (2020-4).

SETTING

England: national survey; qualitative work in three areas (two Vanguards); analysis of national primary care data across early implementation of Enhanced Health in Care Homes and the COVID-19 pandemic.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and fifty general practice survey respondents; 101 interviewees (general practitioners, practice managers, receptionists, care home managers, nurses, senior carers, residents, relatives, commissioners) in three areas; 103,732 care home residents ≥ 75 years, registered with participating practices in Clinical Research Datalink Aurum 2019-21.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis identified three themes concerned with general practitioner services to care homes: relational processes, communication and organisation. Continuity of care, sensitivity to the skills of care home staff and routines of the home, along with a willingness to dedicate time to patients, are all crucial. Different structures (e.g. scheduled visits) provide opportunities to develop effective, efficient care, but flounder without established, trusting relationships. The way in which new initiatives are implemented is crucial to acceptance and ultimate success: telemedicine was an example that generated efficiencies for the National Health Service, but could be a burden to care homes, resented by staff and perceived as a barrier to overcome. One hundred and fifty practices responded to our survey, a majority staffed by ≤ 5 general practitioners. Larger practices were more likely to have a nominated general practitioner for care homes and make weekly scheduled visits. Analysis of primary care data found that in practices with a higher number of care home residents, patients had more contacts with primary care and fewer urgent referrals. Between 2019 and 2021, total contacts and estimated costs increased, and urgent referrals and polypharmacy fell.

LIMITATIONS

Sparse evidence of systematic change in Vanguard areas limited our conclusions about specific initiatives. Implementation of national policy during the COVID-19 pandemic complicates data interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger practices or those with higher numbers of care home residents were more likely to adopt ways of working that are associated with higher-quality care. However, trusting relationships between care homes and a motivated, adequately resourced primary care workforce may be more important than models of care, in enhancing primary care for care homes. General practices and care homes find creative ways around initiatives that are not perceived to offer any benefits, emphasising the need for local flexibility when implementing national initiatives.

FUTURE WORK

Future work could address how best to promote ways of working that prioritise trusting relationships; the absence of care pathways specific to care home patients, and the impact of Enhanced Health in Care Homes on system-wide costs.

FUNDING

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 14/196/05) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 13, No. 11. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

摘要

背景

全科医疗为约40万名养老院居民提供国民保健服务一线护理。优质的初级保健可以增进居民的健康和福祉,并优化医院服务的使用。

目的

本研究旨在探讨全科医疗的组织形式与居民、全科医疗及养老院工作人员的观点和经历、结果及成本之间的关系。

设计

2018年全科医疗调查、2019年定性研究、2019 - 2021年初级保健数据分析。

政策背景

英国国民保健服务先锋计划在五个领域为养老院服务创新提供资金(2015 - 2018年);《养老院强化健康计划》在英格兰引入标准化的养老院医疗保健流程(2020 - 2024年)。

背景

英格兰:全国性调查;在三个地区(两个先锋计划地区)开展定性研究;对《养老院强化健康计划》早期实施阶段及新冠疫情期间的全国初级保健数据进行分析。

参与者

150名参与全科医疗调查的受访者;三个地区的101名受访者(全科医生、诊所经理、接待员、养老院经理、护士、高级护理员、居民、亲属、医疗服务专员);2019 - 2021年在临床研究数据链接奥鲁姆中向参与研究的诊所注册的103,732名75岁及以上养老院居民。

结果

定性分析确定了与全科医生为养老院提供服务相关​​的三个主题:关系流程、沟通和组织。护理的连续性、对养老院工作人员技能和养老院日常工作的敏感性,以及为患者投入时间的意愿,都至关重要。不同的结构(如定期探访)为发展有效、高效的护理提供了机会,但如果没有建立起相互信任的关系,就会陷入困境。新举措的实施方式对于被接受程度和最终成功至关重要:远程医疗就是一个例子,它为国民保健服务带来了效率,但可能给养老院带来负担,遭到工作人员反感,并被视为需要克服的障碍。150家诊所回复了我们的调查,大多数诊所的全科医生人数≤5人。规模较大的诊所更有可能为养老院指定一名全科医生并进行每周定期探访。初级保健数据分析发现,在养老院居民数量较多的诊所,患者与初级保健的接触更多,紧急转诊更少。2019年至2021年期间,总接触次数和估计成本增加,紧急转诊和多重用药情况减少。

局限性

先锋计划地区系统变革的证据稀少,限制了我们对具体举措的结论。新冠疫情期间国家政策的实施使数据解读变得复杂。

结论

规模较大的诊所或养老院居民数量较多的诊所更有可能采用与更高质量护理相关的工作方式。然而,在加强养老院的初级保健方面,养老院与积极主动、资源充足的初级保健工作人员之间的信任关系可能比护理模式更重要。全科医疗诊所和养老院会针对那些被认为没有任何益处的举措找到创造性的解决办法,这强调了在实施国家举措时需要地方灵活性。

未来工作

未来的工作可以探讨如何最好地推广优先考虑信任关系的工作方式;缺乏针对养老院患者的护理路径,以及《养老院强化健康计划》对全系统成本的影响。

资金

本奖项由英国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生与社会保健交付研究计划资助(NIHR奖项编号:14/196/05),并全文发表于《卫生与社会保健交付研究》;第13卷,第11期。有关更多奖项信息,请参阅NIHR资金与奖项网站。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验